International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Current Issues in Bladder Cancer: Working Group 3: Subcategorization of T1 Bladder Cancer

Antonio Lopez-Beltran, Maria R. Raspollini, Donna Hansel, Eva Compérat, Sean R. Williamson, Fredrik Liedberg, Kenneth A. Iczkowski, Lukas Bubendorf, Theodorus H. Van Der Kwast, Liang Cheng

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Emerging data on T1 bladder cancer subcategorization (aka substaging) suggests a correlation with oncological outcomes. The International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) organized the 2022 consensus conference in Basel, Switzerland to focus on current issues in bladder cancer and tasked working group 3 to make recommendations for T1 subcategorization in transurethral bladder resections. For this purpose, the ISUP developed and circulated a survey to their membership querying approaches to T1 bladder cancer subcategorization. In particular, clinical relevance, pathological reporting, and endorsement of T1 subcategorization in the daily practice of pathology were surveyed. Of the respondents of the premeeting survey, about 40% do not routinely report T1 subcategory. We reviewed literature on bladder T1 subcategorization, and screened selected articles for clinical performance and practicality of T1 subcategorization methods. Published literature offered evidence of the clinical rationale for T1 subcategorization and at the conference consensus (83% of conference attendants) was obtained to report routinely T1 subcategorization of transurethral resections. Semiquantitative T1 subcategorization was favored (37%) over histoanatomic methods (4%). This is in line with literature findings on practicality and prognostic impact, that is, a shift of publications from histoanatomic to semiquantitative methods or by reports incorporating both methodologies is apparent over the last decade. However, 59% of participants had no preference for either methodology. They would add a comment in the report briefly stating applied method, interpretation criteria (including cutoff), and potential limitations. When queried on the terminology of T1 subcategorization, 34% and 20% of participants were in favor of T1 (microinvasive) versus T1 (extensive) or T1 (focal) versus T1 (nonfocal), respectively.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)E24-E31
JournalAmerican Journal of Surgical Pathology
Volume48
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2024 Jan

Subject classification (UKÄ)

  • Urology and Nephrology

Free keywords

  • muscularis mucosae
  • prognostic
  • T1 bladder cancer
  • T1 subcategorization

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Current Issues in Bladder Cancer: Working Group 3: Subcategorization of T1 Bladder Cancer'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this